Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2026 09:45:06 -0800 From: Pete Wright <pete@nomadlogic.org> To: Mario Marietto <marietto2008@gmail.com>, Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>, FreeBSD virtualization <freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RFC: Kernel virtiofs driver Message-ID: <9c3f1865-d47f-4fcf-a34b-866ee727a25b@nomadlogic.org> In-Reply-To: <CA%2B1FSijd9Cgr7KAL_pD0ACCr7%2BGTMoXR9zQ=skNVFdkstP6KJA@mail.gmail.com> References: <CABFh=a5HoDOHthe%2BavAAxpb3YN4W3FAGqCysdbyrBbr4Rw7rMg@mail.gmail.com> <CA%2B1FSijd9Cgr7KAL_pD0ACCr7%2BGTMoXR9zQ=skNVFdkstP6KJA@mail.gmail.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 2/9/26 10:57 PM, Mario Marietto wrote: > |Hello Emil,| > > |Inside a FreeBSD guest OS (15.0-RELEASE) I do :| > > kldload virtio_p9fs > > kldload p9fs_load > > |mount -t p9fs sharename /mnt/host| > > || > > |This works for me,I can share files between FreeBSD 15.0 guest and > FreeBSD 14.3 host os. So,what's missing in this case and which features > you added ?| > i had a similar question since i've been happy with p9fs. the virtiofs faq states (https://virtio-fs.gitlab.io/): "Existing solutions to this problem, such as virtio-9p, are based on existing network protocols that are not optimized for virtualization use cases. As a result they do not perform as well as local file systems and do not provide the semantics that some applications rely on. Virtiofs takes advantage of the virtual machine’s co-location with the hypervisor to avoid overheads associated with network file systems." that seems super reasonable to me. i also think there is windows support for virtiofs which is probably another benefit. -pete -- Pete Wright pete@nomadlogic.orghome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9c3f1865-d47f-4fcf-a34b-866ee727a25b>